Zhonghua xin xue guan bing za zhi · 2008
[Outcome of patients implanted with bioabsorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (Excel) and the durable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (Cypher)].
Сравнительное исследованиеКонтролируемое клиническое исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
GAO Zhan, YANG Yue-jin, CHEN Ji-lin, Qiao Shu-bin, XU Bo, QIN Xue-wen, YAO Min, LIU Hai-bo, WU Yong-jian, YUAN Jin-qing, CHEN Jue, YOU Shi-jie, Li Jian-Jun, GAO Run-lin
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcome of patients with coronary artery disease implanted with bioabsorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (Excel) and the durable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (Cypher).
METHODS: One year clinical and 7 months angiographic follow-up data were analyzed in 591 consecutive patients implanted with Excel (E group: n = 350, 58.1 +/- 10.9 years old) or Cypher (C group: n = 241, 56.4 +/- 10.7 years old) during May 2006 to November 2006 in our center.
RESULTS: There were more patients with old myocardial infarction and triple vessel diseases while there were less left main stem disease in E group compared to those of C group at baseline. Reference vessel diameter [(2.76 +/- 0.45) mm vs. (2.87 +/- 0.38) mm, P = 0.043], stent diameter [(3.11 +/- 0.48) mm vs. (3.25 +/- 0.34) mm, P = 0.045] and minimal stent diameter [(2.67 +/- 0.43) mm vs. (2.78 +/- 0.35) mm, P = 0.046] and rate of post-dilation (15.9% vs. 46.7%, P < 0.001) were all significantly smaller in E group compared to those in C group. Procedure was successful in all patients. One year clinical follow-up results showed similar results on major adverse cardiac events (MACE) rate (8.3% vs. 7.1%, P = 0.641), rate of cardiac death (0.9% vs.0.0%, P = 0.274), non-fatal myocardial infarction (2.0% vs. 1.2%, P = 0.747) and target vessel revascularization (5.4% vs. 5.8%, P = 0.857) between E and C groups. Total (0.9% vs. 0.4%, P = 0.649), early (0.6% vs. 0.0%, P = 0.516) and late (0.3% vs. 0.4%, P = 1.000) stent thrombosis rates according to Academic Research Consortium (ARC) standard definitions (definite + probable) were also similar between the E and C groups. Seven months angiographic follow-up results indicated that there were no differences of in-stent and in-segment restenosis rate between E and C groups (4.7% vs. 3.2%, P = 0.725; 5.6% vs. 3.2%, P = 0.505) but in-stent and in-segment late loss were significantly smaller in E group than those in C group [(0.18 +/- 0.07) mm vs. (0.21 +/- 0.08) mm, P < 0.001; (0.21 +/- 0.09) mm vs. (0.23 +/- 0.11) mm, P = 0.003].
CONCLUSION: One year clinical and 7 months angiographic outcome were comparable in patients implanted with Excel and Cypher sirolimus-eluting stents.
METHODS: One year clinical and 7 months angiographic follow-up data were analyzed in 591 consecutive patients implanted with Excel (E group: n = 350, 58.1 +/- 10.9 years old) or Cypher (C group: n = 241, 56.4 +/- 10.7 years old) during May 2006 to November 2006 in our center.
RESULTS: There were more patients with old myocardial infarction and triple vessel diseases while there were less left main stem disease in E group compared to those of C group at baseline. Reference vessel diameter [(2.76 +/- 0.45) mm vs. (2.87 +/- 0.38) mm, P = 0.043], stent diameter [(3.11 +/- 0.48) mm vs. (3.25 +/- 0.34) mm, P = 0.045] and minimal stent diameter [(2.67 +/- 0.43) mm vs. (2.78 +/- 0.35) mm, P = 0.046] and rate of post-dilation (15.9% vs. 46.7%, P < 0.001) were all significantly smaller in E group compared to those in C group. Procedure was successful in all patients. One year clinical follow-up results showed similar results on major adverse cardiac events (MACE) rate (8.3% vs. 7.1%, P = 0.641), rate of cardiac death (0.9% vs.0.0%, P = 0.274), non-fatal myocardial infarction (2.0% vs. 1.2%, P = 0.747) and target vessel revascularization (5.4% vs. 5.8%, P = 0.857) between E and C groups. Total (0.9% vs. 0.4%, P = 0.649), early (0.6% vs. 0.0%, P = 0.516) and late (0.3% vs. 0.4%, P = 1.000) stent thrombosis rates according to Academic Research Consortium (ARC) standard definitions (definite + probable) were also similar between the E and C groups. Seven months angiographic follow-up results indicated that there were no differences of in-stent and in-segment restenosis rate between E and C groups (4.7% vs. 3.2%, P = 0.725; 5.6% vs. 3.2%, P = 0.505) but in-stent and in-segment late loss were significantly smaller in E group than those in C group [(0.18 +/- 0.07) mm vs. (0.21 +/- 0.08) mm, P < 0.001; (0.21 +/- 0.09) mm vs. (0.23 +/- 0.11) mm, P = 0.003].
CONCLUSION: One year clinical and 7 months angiographic outcome were comparable in patients implanted with Excel and Cypher sirolimus-eluting stents.